MDL Docket No

Case 1:17-md-02800-TWT Document 375 Filed 05/14/18 Page 1 of 122 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ATLANTA DIVISION _____________________________ ) MDL Docket No. 2800 In re: Equifax, Inc. Customer ) Case No.: 1:17-md-2800-TWT Data Security Breach Litigation ) ) ) CONSUMER ACTIONS _____________________________ ) CONSOLIDATED CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT FOR SMALL BUSINESS CLAIMS Amy E. Keller Kenneth S. Canfield DICELLO LEVITT & CASEY LLC DOFFERMYRE SHIELDS Ten North Dearborn Street CANFIELD & KNOWLES, LLC Eleventh Floor 1355 Peachtree Street, N.E. Suite 1900 Chicago, Illinois 60602 Atlanta, Georgia 30309 Norman E. Siegel STUEVE SIEGEL HANSON LLP 460 Nichols Road, Suite 200 Kansas City, Missouri 64112 Consumer Plaintiffs’ Co-Lead Counsel Other Counsel Identified on Signature Pages Case 1:17-md-02800-TWT Document 375 Filed 05/14/18 Page 2 of 122 The plaintiffs identified below (collectively, “Business Plaintiffs”), individually and on behalf of the Classes defined below of similarly situated business entities, allege the following against Defendants Equifax Inc., Equifax Information Services LLC (“EIS”), and Equifax Consumer Services LLC (“ECS”) (collectively, “Equifax” or “Defendants”), based upon personal knowledge with respect to themselves and on information and belief derived from, among other things, investigation of counsel and review of public documents as to all other matters. INTRODUCTION 1. Equifax plays a central role in the modern American economy, collecting and selling vast amounts of data about the most important details of consumers’ financial lives. That data―names, birthdates, Social Security numbers, credit card information, drivers’ license numbers, and more―contains the keys that unlock a consumer’s identity and is relied upon by third parties to make major financial decisions affecting almost all Americans. Equifax understood it had an enormous responsibility to protect the data it collected and assured the public that: “At Equifax, the security of our customers’ information is paramount.” But, as its former CEO has acknowledged, Equifax has not lived up to that responsibility or fulfilled its public assurances to protect Americans’ confidential information. 1 Case 1:17-md-02800-TWT Document 375 Filed 05/14/18 Page 3 of 122 2. On September 7, 2017, Equifax announced that it was subject to one of the largest data breaches in our nation’s history. Taking advantage of glaring weaknesses and vulnerabilities in the company’s data security systems, hackers stole the personal and financial information of nearly 150 million Americans from mid- May through the end of July, 2017. During that entire two and one-half month period, Equifax failed to detect the hackers’ presence, notice the massive amounts of data that were being exfiltrated from its databases, or take any steps to investigate the numerous other red flags that should have warned the company about what was happening. 3. Equifax has attributed the breach to a low-level employee’s failure to install a necessary software patch. While that employee’s negligence may have created the door through which the hackers first entered, the breach was in fact the inevitable result of Equifax’s systemic incompetence and a longstanding, lackluster approach to data security that permeated the company’s culture from the top down. Indeed, Equifax’s cavalier attitude about data security persisted despite warnings by outside cybersecurity experts, the occurrence of other data breaches at Equifax, and numerous high-profile data breaches at other major American corporations, all of which should have alerted Equifax of the need to revamp and enhance its woefully inadequate data security practices. 2 Case 1:17-md-02800-TWT Document 375 Filed 05/14/18 Page 4 of 122 4. The severity of this breach is unprecedented, affecting almost half of the American population. Nearly all of the victims had no prior relationship with Equifax, and there is no mechanism to opt-out of Equifax’s collection and sale of this data. The hackers obtained at least 146.6 million names, 146.6 million dates of birth, 145.5 million Social Security numbers, 99 million addresses, 17.6 million driver’s license numbers, 209,000 credit card numbers, and 97,500 tax identification numbers. Using this information, identity thieves can create fake identities, fraudulently obtain loans and tax refunds, and destroy a consumer’s creditworthiness—the very thing Equifax exists to assess and report. And because Social Security numbers do not expire and are almost impossible to change, thieves will be able to do so for years to come. As one knowledgeable analyst noted soon after the breach was announced: “On a scale of 1 to 10 in terms of risk to consumers, this is a 10.” 5. Since the Equifax breach occurred, small businesses across the United States have been directly and negatively impacted because of the breach, incurring costs to mitigate the risk, such as buying credit monitoring products or spending $100 for a business credit report that would have been unnecessary but for the Equifax data breach. Equifax’s negligence and the resulting breach have jeopardized that credit, and small businesses around the country are at risk of losing their access 3 Case 1:17-md-02800-TWT Document 375 Filed 05/14/18 Page 5 of 122 to credit, having to pay more for credit (for example, through higher interest rates), losing their collateral, and struggling to maintain their operations. They remain subject to a pervasive, substantial, and imminent risk of fraud and negative credit consequences flowing from the unauthorized dissemination of their owners’ Personal Information. 6. Financial advisors, experts, and even the media are advising such businesses to procure business credit monitoring and other credit protection products, which are sold by Equifax and other entities. Although Equifax has been urged repeatedly to provide these products to small businesses for free after the breach, it has refused to do so and instead continues to profit from the credit concerns that it caused. 7. As further described herein, Business Plaintiffs assert claims for themselves, and on behalf of all similarly situated businesses in the United States, for Equifax’s negligence, negligence per se, and for violations of state statute. Business Plaintiffs seek all available monetary relief, including damages and restitution, and equitable relief, including an injunction to halt Equifax’s unlawful conduct. 4 Case 1:17-md-02800-TWT Document 375 Filed 05/14/18 Page 6 of 122 JURISDICTION AND VENUE 8. This Consolidated Complaint and is intended to serve as a superseding complaint as to all previous complaints centralized in this multidistrict litigation that were filed on behalf of non-financial institution business entities, and to serve as the operative pleading on behalf of such entities. As set forth herein, this Court has general jurisdiction over Equifax and original jurisdiction over Business Plaintiffs’ claims. 9. This Court has subject-matter jurisdiction pursuant to the Class Action Fairness Act of 2005, 28 U.S.C. § 1332(d)(2), because this is a class action in which the matter in controversy exceeds the sum of $5,000,000, and Equifax is a citizen of a State different from that of at least one Class member. This Court also has supplemental jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1367(a) because all claims alleged herein form part of the same case or controversy. 10. Venue is proper in this District under 28 U.S.C. § 1391(a) through (d) because Equifax’s principal place of business is located in this District and substantial parts of the events or omissions giving rise to the claims occurred in the District. Venue is also proper in the Atlanta Division because Equifax is located here and the causes of action arose here. 5 Case 1:17-md-02800-TWT Document 375 Filed 05/14/18 Page 7 of 122 NAMED PLAINTIFFS 11. The below Business Plaintiffs appear on behalf of themselves and those similarly situated. Equifax, through its actions described herein, has caused them present, immediate, imminent, and continuing increased risk of harm. CALIFORNIA 12. Business Plaintiff Sharps Investment Enterprises, LLC, is a limited liability company existing under the laws of the State of California. Sharps Investment Enterprises, LLC, relies in part on credit to operate. Sharps Investment Enterprises, LLC, relies on the personal credit of Joshua Sharps, the individual whose Personal Information was compromised in the Equifax breach, to obtain and maintain its own credit. The breach has thus jeopardized not only Joshua Sharps’ personal credit, but also the creditworthiness and continued operations of Sharps Investment Enterprises, LLC. Sharps Investment Enterprises, LLC, has reasonably incurred costs (in the form of a business credit report and devotion of resources to monitoring its financial accounts) based on the substantial risk of harm from the breach. DELAWARE 13. Business Plaintiff The Mello Group, Inc., is a corporation and a small business existing under the laws of the State of Delaware. The Mello Group, Inc., 6 Case 1:17-md-02800-TWT Document 375 Filed 05/14/18 Page 8 of 122 relies in part on credit to operate. The Mello Group, Inc., relies on the personal credit of Chris Williams, an individual whose Personal Information was compromised in the Equifax breach, to obtain and maintain its own credit. The breach has thus jeopardized not only his personal credit, but also the creditworthiness and continued operations of The Mello Group, Inc. The Mello Group, Inc., has reasonably incurred costs (in the form of a business credit report and devotion of resources to monitoring its financial accounts) based on the substantial risk of harm from the breach. FLORIDA 14. Business Plaintiff Pierce N Tell of Sarasota, LLC, is a limited liability company existing under the laws of the State of Florida.

Load more